Skip to main content

St Thomas Aquinas: Is Fr. John Zuhlsdorf Allowed To Go Higher Than The Waters Of The Deluge & The Fire Of The Final Conflagration? Article 1.


To all you intellectual heavyweights who have the Summa of St. Thomas memorized - please be practical and put your insights and talent to a good use and answer a simple question:

Are men allow to travel over 15 cubits above the Mountain tops (29,050ft), when God did not allow the waters of the deluge to exceed 15 cubits above the Mountain tops? And since the fire of the final conflagration at the end of days is not allowed to 15 cubits above the Mountain tops I would think that God has firmly established this 29,050 ft boundary. 

So how is it possible for man to exceed a boundary that God has established? If nature isn't allowed - why should man be allowed?

Does not God pay attention to His established boundary? and does not God know that men exceed this boundary 24/7?

Will not God correct man in some fashion and teach man a lesson that it is very important to follow the laws of God?

And will not God punish man soon for exceeding 24/7 His established boundary?

hmmmm....I know the lot of you Thomists would rather sit in the dark and use the Summa for speculative purpose and ignore and practical applications of the book...but please look into this very important question.

I start with the first article of the Question 74. The fire of the final conflagration



Objection 1. It would seem that there is not to be any cleansing of the world. For only that which is unclean needs cleansing. Now God's creatures are not unclean, wherefore it is written (Acts 10:15): "That which God hath cleansed, do not thou call common," i.e. unclean. Therefore the creatures of the world shall not be cleansed.

Objection 2. Further, according to Divine justice cleansing is directed to the removal of the uncleanness of sin, as instanced in the cleansing after death. But there can be no stain of sin in the elements of this world. Therefore, seemingly, they need not to be cleansed.

Objection 3. Further, a thing is said to be cleansed when any foreign matter that depreciates it is removed therefrom: for the removal of that which ennobles a thing is not called a cleansing, but rather a diminishing. Now it pertains to the perfection and nobility of the elements that something of a foreign nature is mingled with them, since the form of a mixed body is more noble than the form of a simple body. Therefore it would seem nowise fitting that the elements of this world can possibly be cleansed.

On the contrary, All renewal is effected by some kind of cleansing. But the elements will be renewed; hence it is written (Apocalypse 21:1): "I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth was gone." Therefore the elements shall be cleansed.

Further, a gloss [St. Augustine, De Civ. Dei xx, 16 on 1 Corinthians 7:31, "The fashion of this earth passeth away," says: "The beauty of this world will perish in the burning of worldly flames." Therefore the same conclusion follows.

I answer that, Since the world was, in a way, made for man's sake, it follows that, when man shall be glorified in the body, the other bodies of the world shall also be changed to a better state, so that it is rendered a more fitting place for him and more pleasant to look upon. Now in order that man obtain the glory of the body, it behooves first of all those things to be removed which are opposed to glory. There are two, namely the corruption and stain of sin--because according to 1 Corinthians 15:50, "neither shall corruption possess incorruption," and all the unclean shall be without the city of glory (Apocalypse 22:15)--and again, the elements require to be cleansed from the contrary dispositions, ere they be brought to the newness of glory, proportionately to what we have said with regard to man. Now although, properly speaking, a corporeal thing cannot be the subject of the stain of sin, nevertheless, on account of sin corporeal things contract a certain unfittingness for being appointed to spiritual purposes; and for this reason we find that places where crimes have been committed are reckoned unfit for the performance of sacred actions therein, unless they be cleansed beforehand. Accordingly that part of the world which is given to our use contracts from men's sins a certain unfitness for being glorified, wherefore in this respect it needs to be cleansed. In like manner with regard to the intervening space, on account of the contact of the elements, there are many corruptions, generations and alterations of the elements, which diminish their purity: wherefore the elements need to be cleansed from these also, so that they be fit to receive the newness of glory.

Reply to Objection 1. When it is asserted that every creature of God is clean we are to understand this as meaning that its substance contains no alloy of evil, as the Manichees maintained, saying that evil and good are two substances in some places severed from one another, in others mingled together. But it does not exclude a creature from having an admixture of a foreign nature, which in itself is also good, but is inconsistent with the perfection of that creature. Nor does this prevent evil from being accidental to a creature, although not mingled with it as part of its substance.

Reply to Objection 2. Although corporeal elements cannot be the subject of sin, nevertheless, from the sin that is committed in them they contract a certain unfitness for receiving the perfection of glory.

Reply to Objection 3. The form of a mixed body and the form of an element may be considered in two ways: either as regards the perfection of the species, and thus a mixed body is more perfect--or as regards their continual endurance; and thus the simple body is more noble, because it has not in itself the cause of corruption, unless it be corrupted by something extrinsic: whereas a mixed body has in itself the cause of its corruption, namely the composition of contraries. Wherefore a simple body, although it be corruptible in part is incorruptible as a whole, which cannot be said of a mixed body. And since incorruption belongs to the perfection of glory, it follows that the perfection of a simple is more in keeping with the perfection of glory, than the perfection of a mixed body, unless the mixed body has also in itself some principle of incorruption, as the human body has, the form of which is incorruptible. Nevertheless, although a mixed body is somewhat more noble than a simple body, a simple body that exists by itself has a more noble being than if it exist in a mixed body, because in a mixed body simple bodies are somewhat in potentiality, whereas, existing by themselves, they are in their ultimate perfection

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

MANDALAY Shooter Stephen Paddock Was A Former NASA EMPLOYEE?

Former NASA employee Stephen Paddock murdered 58 wounded 528 in the MANDALAY MASSACRE.
No.
It's a typo.....

Stephen Paddock Had 16 Guns Inside His Hotel Room & Fatally Shot Himself Before Police Found Him Police said the shooter is a “local individual” who was firing from the 32nd floor of the Mandalay Bay hotel just outside the concert area. He died inside the hotel room after a police SWAT team used an explosive breach to blow open the door and then engaged with him. Police said they believe he died of a self-inflicted gunshot wound before officers arrived in the room. A security guard who went to the room before officers arrived was shot through the door by the gunman. His condition was not known Monday night. According to police scanner transmissions, 72 minutes passed between the first shots fired and when officers breached the hotel room where Paddock was holed up. Source
Millionaire Gun Nut Gambler Hunter Pilot The man suspected of opening fire at concertgoers attendin…

Stephen Paddock Shot Aviation Fuel Tanks From His Mandalay Bay Hotel Room

Las Vegas Strip mass murderer Stephen Paddock used his Mandalay Bay hotel room to fire bullets at jet fuel tanks Sunday night, a knowledgeable source told the Las Vegas Review-Journal. The bullets left two holes in one of two circular white tanks. One of the bullets penetrated the tank, but did not cause a fire or explosion near the Route 91 Harvest country music festival, another knowledgeable source said late Wednesday. The tanks are roughly 1,100 feet from the concert site, where Paddock killed 58 people and wounded almost 500. Several airplane hangars belonging to prominent corporations are also near the tanks. Source
Would not have triggered an explosion:
“A machine gun is not going to blow up a tank of fuel,” Boyd said. “Jet fuel itself sitting there in a big wet pile is very hard to ignite. You have to be a very amateur terrorist to think anything like that.”

SMOKE OF SATAN ON BOARD: Aer Lingus #EI712 Evacuated Due To Smoke In Cockpit

Aer Lingus #EI712 evacuated via emergency slides at Cork airport due to smoke in cockpit 
Aer Lingus flight #EI712 to London Heathrow returned to Cork Airport due to smoke in cockpit.  The Airbus A320 (reg. EI-GAL) departed Cork at 12:45 UTC but pilots took the decision to return 15 mins later after smoke filled the cockpit. The aircraft landed at 13:25 followed by fire brigade. 149 passengers were evacuated by emergency slides. Source
Here, read from a Saint on where the Demons reside:

Summa Th. I EN Qu.64 a.4 Article: 4 Whether our atmosphere is the demons' place of punishment?
Objection: 
1. It would seem that this atmosphere is not the demons' place of punishment. For a demon is a spiritual nature. But a spiritual nature is not affected by place. Therefore there is no place of punishment for demons.
2. Further, man's sin is not graver than the demons'. But man's place of punishment is hell. Much more, therefore, is it the demons' place of punishment; and consequ…